Iran increases threats over the Strait of Hormuz: how does the regime plan to survive and how much room does Trump have left?

Extreme card

In this context, international analyst Ricardo Falla, professor at the Antonio Ruiz de Montoya University (UARM), maintains that the hardening of Iranian discourse responds to an extreme situation. “Iran is losing around $500 million a day because it cannot export its oil, and that is leading it to play a extreme card to survive”he explains.

For the specialist, the threat over the Strait of Hormuz should be understood more as a pressure tool than as an immediate objective. “Closing Hormuz is an extreme negotiating card: all or nothing to force the United States to give in”he states.

Falla warns, however, that the risk of escalation is real due to the high militarization of the area. “It only takes one mine or a drone to generate a domino effect and an open confrontation”he points out, in reference to the strategic corridor through which a fifth of the world’s oil circulates.

In that scenario, the consequences could be global. “If a war breaks out, oil can exceed $150 and financial chaos is generated. And there is also the impact on marine insurance”he adds.

The UARM professor remembers that, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, insurance companies had to assume millionaire losses due to the magnitude of the damage and the profile of the victims, linked to large corporations.

In a conflict scenario in the Strait of Hormuz, he explains, the effect could be similar: “insurance companies would have to cover the loss of vessels and lives, in operations linked to large oil companies”. This, he adds, would imply a significant increase in the costs of the sector and greater pressure on the global economy.

Regarding the harshness of the Iranian leaders’ speech, the analyst considers A Persian Gulf without a US presence is unlikely to be viable in the short term.although it recognizes its strategic value. “It is not realistic in economic terms, but yes it is effective in an asymmetric negotiation”indica.

An eventual total control of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran could set a dangerous precedent globally. If the idea that a country can restrict passage through strategic routes is consolidated, the principle of free navigation that governs international trade would be called into question. This, explains Falla, would open the door for other key points—such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Malacca—to face similar situations, affecting the global legal and economic order.